Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why don't we have Wayland on Raspberry Pi yet? (2018)

joshondesign.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 259 posts

Re: Why don't we have Wayland on Raspberry Pi yet? (2018)

#71

Post by cat199 »

mindcrime wrote: post #43
altmind wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Xorg remoting was poorly designed to accomodate DRI/DRM, video card acceleration and had adequate performance to only display primitives on screen. Thats the reasons of poor Xorg remoting adoption. I dont remember seeing anyone in this decade using it - it hands down lost to vnc/nx and rdp.

I use it, so I could care less about your "it hands down lost to vnc/nx and rdp" assessment. And until Wayland has a mechanism that has the flexibility of X remoting, it is a strictly inferior technology - for my purposes. That doesn't mean that I may not be forced to adopt it due to market forces, but let's not pretend that this isn't a glaring hole in Wayland for many people.

not to mention that 'poor adoptation' is much more likely driven by 'isolated single user on ubuntu laptop that doesn't know this exists' usecase dominating in sheer numbers over 'network of unix workstations operated by group of knowledgable users' than 'application X is slightly slow over the network, boo'

Re: Why don't we have Wayland on Raspberry Pi yet? (2018)

#72

Post by wyldfire »

bitwize wrote: post #30
jolmg wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The bar for being important enough to not discard when it works and is the only solution to particular problems is not very high. I know of no other method to forward individual programs GUIs to other machines. Abandoning X is abandoning a power we have. You're right that it may not be used as much. Last time I used it was to debug why selenium tests running in chrome were failing in a server with a virtual display (…

> Abandoning X is abandoning a power we have. A power that literally no one uses. Well, no one that matters anyway. For values of "matter" equivalent to "uses a modern desktop". Whatever the case, modern development heavily favors coding for the common case, not supporting a flexible framework that can accommodate fringe cases. And in 2019, your use case is fringe.

I don't think it's really a fringe use case, I actually think it's much more common than you think.

Re: Why don't we have Wayland on Raspberry Pi yet? (2018)

#73

Post by simion314 »

mwfunk wrote: post #9

I enjoyed the article but this quote jumped out at me: "What took thirty years to build isn't going to be replaced in a day." This was in regard to replacing X11 with Wayland. It's funny because it would be closer to the truth to say that X11 took 5 years to build, and for the last 25 years everyone has been trying to get off of it, but in the meantime piling more stuff on top of it since that's easier than starting…

X is good enough for majority of the users, even if the architecture is not perfect.

Re: Why don't we have Wayland on Raspberry Pi yet? (2018)

#74

Post by cbdumas »

michaelmrose wrote: post #66
cbdumas wrote: post #56

I've been using swaywm on my laptop (XPS 13) with XWayland disabled for a few months now and have had very few problems with it. As far as I can tell Firefox works perfectly, except for some very strange behavior if I try to enable hardware acceleration. I love how easy it is to configure via config files, external monitors work great, scaling on HiDPI displays has been totally painless. My days off fiddling with xor…

Without hardware acceleration doesn't watching video in the browser pretty much destroy your battery life and use most of your cpu time?

So I'm no expert but I believe there are actually two different notions of hardware acceleration at play here:

1) HW accelerated rendering in Firefox, which despite being unfortunately disabled by default on linux can in my experience be enabled (on about:config) without issues. This makes the experience of scrolling much smoother, so I usually do that. I don't think this has any observable effect on battery life for me. However, enabling this in Sway results in some very odd behavior that breaks certain things so I've had to disable it. I can go into more detail on that if you like.

2) Hardware accelerated video decoding. In contrast to the fist one, this makes a HUGE difference in CPU usage and battery life. However this unfortunately cannot be used in any browser AT ALL in Linux, regardless of setup or configuration. The way I watch youtube videos on my laptop is usually with mpv, which does use hw decoding if it is configured to do so.

Re: Why don't we have Wayland on Raspberry Pi yet? (2018)

#75

Post by cat199 »

temac wrote: post #38
altmind wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Xorg remoting was poorly designed to accomodate DRI/DRM, video card acceleration and had adequate performance to only display primitives on screen. Thats the reasons of poor Xorg remoting adoption. I dont remember seeing anyone in this decade using it - it hands down lost to vnc/nx and rdp.

I use ssh -X all the time.

nonono, you're simply not getting it.

I don't use it for reason X, therefore I can project this reasoning onto those that disagree, and dismiss them by calling them outdated. So, obviously your use case is irrelevant.

Re: Why don't we have Wayland on Raspberry Pi yet? (2018)

#76

Post by BenjiWiebe »

mindcrime wrote: post #43
altmind wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Xorg remoting was poorly designed to accomodate DRI/DRM, video card acceleration and had adequate performance to only display primitives on screen. Thats the reasons of poor Xorg remoting adoption. I dont remember seeing anyone in this decade using it - it hands down lost to vnc/nx and rdp.

I use it, so I could care less about your "it hands down lost to vnc/nx and rdp" assessment. And until Wayland has a mechanism that has the flexibility of X remoting, it is a strictly inferior technology - for my purposes. That doesn't mean that I may not be forced to adopt it due to market forces, but let's not pretend that this isn't a glaring hole in Wayland for many people.

couldn't care less.

Re: Why don't we have Wayland on Raspberry Pi yet? (2018)

#77

Post by aeroevan »

cbdumas wrote: post #74
michaelmrose wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Without hardware acceleration doesn't watching video in the browser pretty much destroy your battery life and use most of your cpu time?

So I'm no expert but I believe there are actually two different notions of hardware acceleration at play here: 1) HW accelerated rendering in Firefox, which despite being unfortunately disabled by default on linux can in my experience be enabled (on about:config) without issues. This makes the experience of scrolling much smoother, so I usually do that. I don't think this has any observable effect on battery life for…

I've used chromium-vaapi on Linux with some success. I don't think those patches have been accepted in upstream chromium though.

Re: Why don't we have Wayland on Raspberry Pi yet? (2018)

#78

Post by tinus_hn »

michaelmrose wrote: post #64
ZiiS wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Meh. As far as I'm concerned, Wayland is strictly superior to X, so long as it fails to support keyloggers.

Except it does actually support keyloggers while breaking the concept of global keybindings. It's like the worst of both worlds.

It’s a red herring anyway. All processes owned by a user can influence all other processes owned by that user, either directly or indirectly. It’s basically impossible to prevent. Don’t run code you don’t trust and don’t let things you don’t trust connect to your display server.

Re: Why don't we have Wayland on Raspberry Pi yet? (2018)

#79

Post by DonHopkins »

jolmg wrote: post #5
0x8BADF00D wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, VNC is just way better. Even running a local Docker container and using X11 forwarding is extremely slow.

It depends on how you define better. VNC may be faster, but it's just because X carries a lot of historical cruft, I believe. Usability-wise, X is more flexible. I can move individual windows between computers in X. I can't do that with VNC. I wouldn't mind doing the jump to Wayland if it were as flexible as X, but that doesn't seem to be the case. Correct me if I'm wrong.

It's not "historical cruft" that makes it slow. It's the fundamental architecture of X-Windows that makes it slow. Computers these days are network bound, not CPU or memory bound. It's not sluggish because it's executing too much code or running out of memory or too complicated. It's sluggish because it's making the wrong decisions to do the wrong things at the wrong times in the wrong places.

Re: Why don't we have Wayland on Raspberry Pi yet? (2018)

#80

Post by mindcrime »

BenjiWiebe wrote: post #76
mindcrime wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I use it, so I could care less about your "it hands down lost to vnc/nx and rdp" assessment. And until Wayland has a mechanism that has the flexibility of X remoting, it is a strictly inferior technology - for my purposes. That doesn't mean that I may not be forced to adopt it due to market forces, but let's not pretend that this isn't a glaring hole in Wayland for many people.

couldn't care less.

They mean the same thing.

https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=Diction...

Post reply on HN